How corporate PACs handle bad PR

When it comes to campaign donations, corporations that suddenly find themselves crosswise with Congress know the playbook.

First, immediately cut off political action committee contributions.

Story Continued Below

Second, refuse to talk about your campaign contributions.

Then, after perhaps taking some lumps at congressional hearings and spending a few months in the political wilderness, quietly begin cutting checks again as if nothing happened.

Such appears to be the case for JPMorgan Chase, which is under fire for losing $2 billion on trades tied to credit derivatives — financial tools that helped damage the U.S. financial system late last decade.

Its PAC typically contributes hundreds of thousands of dollars to federal candidates and committees each election cycle but it hasn’t donated a reportable dime to candidates since May 7, according to federal campaign filings.

In recent years, BP, Goldman Sachs and News Corp.’s American subsidiaries all went down a similar road, turning off their political cash spigots while under the hot glare of the congressional, media and law enforcement spotlight.

Rep. Charles Gonzalez (D-Texas) received — and promptly returned — a $1,000 BP Corporation North America PAC contribution he got less than a month after the Deepwater Horizon drilling platform explosion of April 20, 2010.

“It makes good sense on everyone’s part for a company PAC to suspend campaign money during a period of scrutiny or a period of investigation,” Gonzalez said. “What I look for is whether the company is accountable for its mistake, assumes responsibility and takes substantive measures to correct it. Then I’ll make a decision about accepting support.”

A lawyer who advises JPMorgan tells POLITICO that temporarily severing important financial ties with influential politicians is a better long-term strategy than continuing to donate to them amid a scandal.

“You don’t want to risk a congressman returning a contribution,” the lawyer said. “You want to let the dark clouds pass, you want to let the seas calm, before you start up again.”

When JPMorgan decides to give again, it’ll have plenty of political cash to draw on: $680,375 worth as of June 30, its latest report indicates.

Corporate JPMorgan officials did not return requests for comment.

Gonzalez, who sits on the House Energy and Commerce Committee, said he’d probably accept a BP check today because the company has adequately worked to fix the problems it caused.

BP ultimately stopped giving for nine months from 2010 to early 2011 in the aftermath of the Deepwater Horizon explosion that killed 11 people and sent an estimated 4.9 million gallons of oil into the Gulf of Mexico. Political candidates collectively returned or didn’t deposit tens of thousands of dollars in BP PAC contributions in the months after the spill.

But this election cycle, BP’s regained its status as one of the nation’s more active PACs, routinely spreading five-figures’ worth of contributions among numerous lawmakers.

Last month, for example, BP’s PAC handed out about $16,500 overall, including four-figure sums to the campaigns of Reps. Don Young (R-Alaska), Sheila Jackson Lee (D-Texas), Elijah Cummings (D-Md.), John Culberson (R-Texas) and Jim Costa (D-Calif.).